So can we safely say by now that World War 1 was the point where

I blame the s*rbs

>>868016

When will this meme end?

>>868009
Wrong for who?

Shit certainly benefitted Communism and our American Overlords.

>>868009
No, it was when humans invented writing systems.

>>868016
the Sarbs?

No more Ottoman empire keeping middle east under wraps so yeah maybe.

>>868023
Wacky little ethnic distinctions from some insignificant hill somewhere in the balks make me laugh.
Who even cares what a "serb" even is.
Even funnier is the "turkroach" guy. Talk about butthurt.

>>868043

Are you implying that Turks are not objectively the worst people on the planet?

File: reign-of-terror-hero-H[1].jpg (743KB, 1389x454px) Image search: [Google]

743KB, 1389x454px

>>868009
That's not how you spell the French Revolution.

Well, it definitely destroyed Europe and kickstarted American supremacy.

Britain literally gave the USA all the wealth it had accumulated over the last 100 years of Empire building, European nations lost an entire generation of men, it popularised the notion of self determination and thus ended the easy justification of just taking land and colonising it. Who knows how many of men taken in the war might have gone on to do great things. WW1 also basically caused WW2 since the treaty of versailles was terrible (too punishing or for the contrarians out there, too lenient - take your pick) and the underlying causes of the war were not dealt with. The collapse of the Ottoman Empire and sykes-picot fucked up the middle east and we're still dealing with it today and the rest of the forseeable century. It also gave the traitorous Irish the chance to betray the British. It also solidly broke forever America's isolationism and desire to stay out of European affairs/wars, and basically created a proper US army.

The war was basically pointless, or at the very least absolutely not worth millions of lives, since it was just about petty land grabs and moving borders on a map. The security dilemma basically caused WW1. All the powers knew a war was coming eventually and none of them wanted to be caught off guard because they were afraid of this "inevitable" war so they had arms races and Germany felt compelled to BTFO France as fast as possible to avoid a 2 front war between them and Russia, and the only way to do this was to advance through Belgium, thus dragging Britain into the war... all because some Serbian terrorist killed the Austrian Archduke and the Austrians were fed up of their shit and were going to slap the serbs down and Russia disliked this.

The war probably couldn't have been stopped, but really Germany should have remained neutral, but they were jelly about their lack of Empire and they had the best army in the world and thought they could knock out France.

Britain entering WW1 is the biggest foreign policy mistake of all time.

>muh belgium
>muh scrap of paper

Yeah Germany would have annexed France or large portions of it, that's FAR preferable to what ended up happening.

>>868076
Oh, pls Evola. You're dead.

>>868098
>WW1 also basically caused WW2
that's just... not even simplistic but not really true

>>868107
>Germany
>annex France

Wtf

>>868098
>It also gave the traitorous Irish the chance to betray the British.
Damn those Irish always trying to throw off the English yoke.

>>868023
It isn't a meme. Serbs and Russians caused World War I.
Shouldn't have poked the Germans, you know what they get like.

>>868009
No, it was when the world finally realized war was bad.

>>868694
>It isn't a meme. Serbs and Russians caused World War I.
A high level of historical discourse is expected here.

File: 1454629668205.jpg (57KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 900x900px

>>868541
Not that anon, but I feel it's a very easily argued point that the Versailles Treaty helped create the conditions in Europe that lead to WW2.

>>869238
it's not, certainly not very easily
if it were, why would it take twenty years for the war to break out?
why would the war be aimed eastwards and not at the primary instigators behind the treaty?
why would it only take the great depression for the nazis to take over?
why didn't they experience a meteoric rise in the twenties when the hyperinflation and reparations and the like were in full swing?
(or rather were supposed to be in full swing, because ultimately at the time germany only bothered to pay a fraction of the reparations, nor did they care much about following other parts of the treaty)
why was it the perceived threat of judeo bolshevism and not the issue of the treaty that absolutely dominates hitlers speeches, mein kampf, ideology?
certainly the treaty was a factor, because most political events in the recent past are a factor in the politics of recent future
but remember the claim was it basically caused the war
which literally ignores twenty years of big things happening

>>869273
>if it were, why would it take twenty years for the war to break out?

Because WWI was so bad it was 'the war to end all wars' and the German government at the very least didn't want to kick that shithole off again. Plus the whole 'getting their military disbanded' thing with France keeping a close eye on them to make sure they didn't start building up again.

>why would the war be aimed eastwards and not at the primary instigators behind the treaty?

What? What do you think the Battle of France in 1940 was about? Why do you think Hitler had the French sign their surrender in the same place the Treaty of Versailles was signed? Hitler didn't turn East until 1941!

>why would it only take the great depression for the nazis to take over?

Because in 1919 the party was like ten guys including Hitler (who also spent five years in prison after his first attempt at taking over in 1923), and up until then the government was doing an 'okay' job of keeping Germany from flying apart at the seams.

>why didn't they experience a meteoric rise in the twenties when the hyperinflation and reparations and the like were in full swing?

Because Hitler was in prison for most of that, and he was the charismatic driving force behind getting people into the party.

>why was it the perceived threat of judeo bolshevism and not the issue of the treaty that absolutely dominates hitlers speeches, mein kampf, ideology?

Presumably Hitler needed a scapegoat that he could unite everyone against that wouldn't piss off the massively more capable country next door that's still pissed about WWI? Do you really think the French would have sat around while Hitler stirred up violent anti-French sentiments while also gaining political ground?

>>868016
the Sorbs?

>>868107

>Britain entering WW1 is the biggest foreign policy mistake of all time

Do you not see how Britain's ability to expand and develop one of the biggest Empire's in history was a result of a balanced Europe. When the European Powers cancelled each other out, Britain had a free reign to export its own brand of Imperialism across the globe.

Lets have a good look at what happens if Britain doesn't enter the First World War.

If the Central Powers win:
-Belgian independence is gone. Britain's doesn't give a damn about the name, just the strategic importance it has of allowing sea access onto the English Channel. It also raises massive security concerns over the safety of the Thames Estuary.
-Huge German gains in Central Europe. They would take much more of France than in 1879.
-The Ottoman Empire survives are reasserts its power in the Middle East.

The situation is just as bad if the Allies win without Britain:
-France will almost certainly annex much of Germany. They will increase their share of colonies and take control over much of the Middle East.
-A winning Russia would pose deep concerns to Europe. They would want control over the Balkans and probably get control over Constantinople. This would achieve a key strategic aim of getting access to the Mediterranean.

Britain's aim's in the First World War revolve around defending the international balance of power they currently control. They enter the war to limit the gains of all their rivals and thus preserve the status quo or another situation to their advantage.

>>869621
same tribe t b h

>>868051
>objectively the worst people on the planet
>objectively
>the worst ethnicity in the history of the world
>o b j e c t I v e l y

>>869442
the allies were keeping so close an eye on germany they did literally nothing when they remilitarized in violation of the treaty (and then flexed these new muscles by occupying rhineland etc.)
the battle of france came about as a result of the french and british declaring war on germany, not vice versa, germany which had started the war by attacking eastwards and which did not, after years of appeasement, particularly expect the allies to join in nor did they particularly want to attack westwards at that time
the government doing an 'okay' job until 1923? hitler being in prison for most of that? in what alternate universe? do you really not know the basic timeline of these events? that was literally the worst period in terms of revolutions, economy, hyperinflation etc.
it was afterwards when things steadied and germany experienced economic growth and stabilization (in fact, even while actually paying reparations for a while)

>>868009
"Not every military expert, however, speculates that the forthcoming war will be as destructive as is commonly beleived."

Lmao

>>868009
WW2 is what killed the West and the white race, but I guess that WW1 is what started the process

>>868541
more accurate to say that ww2 wouldn't have happened without ww1 perhaps

>>868107
Kek what?
Staying out would have risked there position on the world stage and hurt thier legitamicy

>>868098
>>868694
OH please all Austria had to do was not annexing Bosnia, but they couldn't help themselves so annexed it they did.

>>871436
Forgetting that you're an edgy fucktard, this is mostly correct. The traditional Western powers essentially bankrupted themselves in WW1, and then absolutely bankrupted themselves in WW2.
But the US were the ones giving out the loans, so they did alright out of the arrangement.

>>869754
Not even remotely.

Prussia should have just let it go, austro-hungaria was already receding, Wilhelm 2nd and Nicholas 2nd sent telegrams constantly so they would gain from Russia annexing Austrohungaria
Also it kickstarts the end of colonialism which stops England being THE superpower, which was bad because of how powerful they were and relatively neutral so could be used to broke peace deals, thus stepping away from world peace